11 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

This is funny to me. It brings back memories of College Professors with degree’s in engineering, wanting me to show them how to repair, and reprogram computers when they “failed” on their own. They often got upset, because I wouldn’t support them, when it should have been the reverse, they should have been supporting me. I just didn’t think working on NASA technological components in the 70’s was relevant to their degree’s. It was the achievements and contributions people like me made that set the standards for today’s world of technology. Because we actually did them. So, you are correct. A degree can be worthless to some people.

Impressive!

By the way, when I upvote some of your posts, it's not because I agree with everything in it, obviously. But that one, like some others, had more to agree with than disagree with.

1 hour ago, Mickey said:

Required? by who?

Harley Miller. (In 1967 through 1970)

2 hours ago, Mickey said:

There is no such instruction to disfellowship any brother on such basis. The worst is the brother not being able to handle certain responsibilities in the congregation.

In 1967 (same year I was baptized) we pretty much knew the reason that anyone was put on probation or disfellowshipped because up until about this time the reason was sometimes announced from the platform. Depending on the nature of the "conduct unbecoming a Christian" and knowledge of the infraction within the congregation, it might be announced the same week or the next week. The brother was the "literature servant" and the "accounts servant," and yes he would lose his privileges, and then gain them back in a few months. But the seriousness of the problem (to the point of disfellowshipping) was when he was caught trying to keep it hidden, and had been in trouble for the same thing two times previously. It was hard keeping things completely hidden, however, because of the extended family (his brother, cousins, nephews, uncles) --some Witnesses, some not-- who also worked for the same boss. In a congregation of only about 45 publishers, there was also unavoidable gossip, and everyone knew each other pretty well. (We sold our house to this brother's brother.)

Some scriptures or some appropriate Watchtower comments would also be read from the platform. For example:

*** w68 8/1 p. 455 Keeping Abreast with Jehovah’s Organization ***
Since then God’s people have obtained a better understanding of many teachings. . . .They also understand better many Bible principles and requirements, such as the need to keep wholly separate from the military and religious parts of Satan’s organization even in employment.
Jehovah’s organization being a moving, progressive one, those who would keep abreast with it must also make progress. . . .  How can we who are Jehovah’s witnesses today keep abreast with God’s rapidly advancing earthly organization? A basic factor toward our doing so is obedience. . . . Of Jesus Christ while on earth it was stated that he learned obedience from the things he suffered. We too, then, must learn obedience.—Heb. 5:8; 13:17.
There are four things that we must do to perfect our obedience. . . .

So it was no secret. And because we knew, that's why I asked my father about his own labs in the electrical engineering dept of the university. They would get electronic military equipment and one of their major funding sources was a large yearly grant from the DoD. Sometimes the university would be expected to respond to requests for research the DoD needed.

45 minutes ago, ARchiv@L said:

I could not add them earlier, (I wanted to add 1 by 1)

I think that's still a good idea if you have time and want to do this. My connection was also very slow, only to this site, earlier today when I was on before.

2 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

I wonder if this was in the mind of Christ when he was being tortured and then killed for our ignorance. He died true to God’s purpose while you will be like Peter to deny Christ thirst (Luke 22:54-57) King James Version (KJV). So, my pride is in my life giver GOD, that scripture wasn’t influenced by higher education in times of old but made relevant to modern theology. My doctorate holds one purpose, as an expensive piece of toilet tissue the day the need presents itself.

I take it that this doctorate you speak of having was obtained after you were baptized. I say that because you have also spoken of conversations with Fred Franz, implying that these were in the 1970's and the fact that you had already made your decision in the 1970's not to go to Bethel, and you were glad you made that decision because of the apostasy of the early 1980's. Previously you claimed two doctorates and it sounded like they were both in theology. "Scholar JW" has also visited this site and I believe he was working on a Master's degree in a related field, and yet he speaks very much like an active JW, as far as I can tell.

So I'm guessing that you are in agreement with me that the organization does not try to have "total control" against education as some have claimed. My father took engineering courses after he was baptized, and two other elders in a Missouri congregation were also professors at the same university. I do not have a doctor's degree and never planned to get one. My wife finished her first master's degree before she was baptized, and finished up enough credits for a second masters and then most of her post-graduate work while still pioneering. Just after baptism, she was both pioneering and still a school-teacher, so she was asked to give her experience at several regional conventions at the time, but she could not mention that she was still continuing her education, too. The little girl who was one of her students and who witnessed to her and left magazines for her was also a part of most of these assembly experiences.

I don't think that a doctorate degree in most subjects is just an expensive piece of toilet paper, but I personally have never posted my degree on my LinkedIn page, or on my wall, either at home or anywhere, ever. It's still in the envelope it came in, and is in a file drawer. I mentioned it on my old resume of course when I was working, because it helped me get jobs in computer science. I rarely hired a person who did not have a degree, as my last company of nearly 30 years frowned on any hires without at least a B.S. or B.A. but I never worried what the degree was in. I found that plenty of good programmers and IT people got their degree in philosophy or English literature, for example. Tells me that we really didn't need to worry about higher education at all.

Today, however, I think it's smarter for a lot of people not to get a degree at all (in the US). Depends on the type of work you will do. Times have changed, and there is often little chance that you can obtain enough work to pay off the student loans. I let all three of my children graduate from college, but that's because my wife and I were able to pay all their student expenses. I think it's fine if you can handle it, but I would not recommend it for everyone, and would never talk about higher education as if it's some necessary part of life. Work experience is more important, even if you struggle to find your place, and then if you make enough money, you can afford a degree (if you so choose). This doesn't work in every field or career, of course. For some things, professional careers and teaching careers, you must have the higher education. But no one should look up to a person or down on a person based on their choices regarding education.

34 minutes ago, AllenSmith said:

I’m sure if the “Ministry” doesn’t know, it does now with your negative and extreme view. And I’m sure Russia has Wikileaks vigorously looking for articles you think contradict those honest answers since the Watchtower has made it a point of “choice” NOT demand when it comes to higher education.

I'm sure that thousands of people hold about the same view I have about higher education and the Watchower's view of higher education. And I'm sure that thousands of current JWs believe the Watchtower's view of higher education is much more extreme and negative than it really is. The Watchtower has sometimes equated higher education with immorality, drug use and other risky behavior. But it is not totally forbidden and if one can show that they are able to handle the demands of higher education and still keep up with congregational responsibilities there is never a backlash from official organizational channels, as far as I'm aware, although one might have to put up with some local prejudices against education.

There is no TOTAL control as has been claimed. That goes for education, blood, shunning and a lot of things that are questioned. But there is still a lot of control, and to the extent this is true, we should be proud of it if we think it's correct. If we feel that something should be hidden from a tribunal of some sort, then we obviously are not proud of our view, or we are fearful of being persecuted for something we think is right.  

The kind of control that I don't think the Russian court is concerned about is the more subtle pressure that comes from judging. Persons who have participated in higher education are often told that they probably have "materialistic envy brewing" for example. Or else it might be implied that they are not paying attention to Paul's words when he said: "Do not be conformed to this world...."

At any rate, for reasons I have pointed out many times, we should always be open and honest and give everyone a reason for the hope that we have whenever anyone demands it. We should really never have to be prepped for court unless we feel we are doing something wrong, or that we don't trust Jehovah's backing if we tell the truth. We should always be able to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help us God.

On 4/12/2017 at 0:42 PM, Kurt said:

This is Vilen Kantere, very famous scientist in Russia and abroad, author of more than 300 works on engineering

 Witness: Vilen Kantere, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Honored Worker of Science and Technology.  Representative of the plaintiff Toporov: "When you became a Witness of Jehovah 25 years ago, did you pursue extremist goals?" Witness: "God forbid!  No, of course! "The witness explains that this is incompatible with the faith of Jehovah's Witnesses.  Axes: "Do you use the materials included in the FSEM?" The witness explains that, as a law-abiding citizen, he destroyed these publications.  (However, Kantere says that he leaves aside the question whether he agrees with the fact that these publications are included in the FSEM.) Dozens of his students defended candidate and doctoral dissertations.  His religion does not contradict his scientific activity.  Asked by the representative of the Ministry of Justice, he explains that his religion does not hinder the receipt of higher education.  As a scientific worker, he believes that education must be treated responsibly. 

Wow. This is perfect! All of them are good. There is no reason to categorize the JWs as extremist, especially in a country with so much more REAL extremism on its plate.

I don't know exactly what they mean by dozens of his students defended candidate and doctoral dissertations, however. Over the years, he has been quoted? But it is very true that our religion does not contradict almost any scientific activity. I only worry that he might throw in things like "his religion does not hinder the receipt of higher education." All the good he stands for can turn to nothing in court if they can poke holes in just one statement like that, assuming it was translated here without the necessary subtleties to make it true. The Ministry of Justice rep would not have asked if he hadn't been given a reason to ask, and this is why even Witnesses should be familiar with the arguments made against us. If three or four Watchtower articles are presented that contradict Brother Kantere, he may not be prepared for it. One can easily make a case that the Watchtower does hinder the receipt of higher education, and this is why Witness children in custody battles in the US have to be specially prepped or kept off the stand.

48 minutes ago, derek1956 said:

She said that she had to leave her job, she didn`t, she said the witnesses told her to leave off a family because doomsday was near, she was baptized at about 33 yeas old, when she left she was about 60, ever since then she and her now husband persecutes JW`s

I don't see that as evidence that she was lying, per se. The WTS made many people leave their jobs during the 27 years between the time she was baptized and the time she left. I once pointed out the hypocrisy of three elders in our congregation working, as professors and engineers for the University of Missouri's engineering departments where the labs, especially, were heavily supported by money coming through military budgets of the Federal Government. Yet these same elders, including my father, were repeatedly required to reprimand and finally even disfellowship a brother and some of his relatives who, as a painter and handyman, could not always maneuver his boss into letting him off the crew that once a year was assigned to paint and provide upkeep to an abandoned army base. Their usual work had nothing to do with the army base. The problem, of course, was that the brother continued losing his job and was treated to longer and longer secular probabation, and therefore it was his ability to support his family. Yet my father would accept the black box from any airline incident, military or civilian. Also, the military was able to take advantage of various semi-conductor inventions that came directly through my father's lab and even his own work. It's not that they didn't question the Society about the rules, but the rules were always in favor of white collar jobs and prejudiced against blue collar and t-shirt jobs.

This does not mean that Witnesses should be banned in Russia or anywhere else. Fortunately, the arguments by Petrova and other ex-JWs are very, very weak.

The ideas that will likely resonate the most are the arguments about separation of families and the difficulties of getting back into normal societal acceptance after leaving JWs. I don't know what the rules are in Russia about privacy of treatment for psychological disorders related to depression and alcoholism, but a Witness here in the United States tells me that it's a good thing for JWs that she can't reveal patterns she is aware of. 

Then again, it's also good to know that depression and alcoholism are not requirements of citizenship in Russia. We've been led to believe that they were.

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

For @JW Insider's sake, I will be very bold and predict that Trump will bring in socialized medicine, though it will not be called that. Even I do not think this likely, but most do not think it possible, so I still come off as being bold, though JTR will say insane.

When a person is all over the place on issues, and is willing to switch his advisors at will, we can always hope that the entropy of chaos will produce one or two anomalies in our favor.

He will definitely look for a few places to eke out a populist win as a counterbalance to undeniable failures, and this could become an option for him to try - but he will fear another failure in Congress. Another option is just to declare all failures as wins, and use the bully pulpit of Presidency+Twitter to make the claim.

TV is on in the next room: Just heard them list about a dozen areas in which Trump has reversed himself: China as currency manipulator, Yellen, export-import bank, etc., etc.

It's what Trump called "choking" when someone else does it. Even Rex Tillerson who plays to the Trump crowd in US interviews, admits that he was very different when meeting with Putin, admitting to Putin that we had no evidence that Russia was complicit with Syria with respect to the "chemical weapons."

16 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Where is it written that we must celebrate the life and death of Jesus?

Good question. Although this was already answered. I'll try a different way:

Notice that the New World Translation correctly translates the word "euphraino" as "celebrate" in Revelation 11:10, Luke 15, and . It's the same word used in Luke 12:19. You might not agree that it has the sense of "celebrate" but here is how the NWT translates it. The NWT does not always translate it with the term "celebrate" but notice the context even in those places, and you should see that the world "celebrate" is just as appropriate even when the NWT sometimes picks another word. In other words you could read those other verses as if they had the word "celebrate" in all those places. In fact you will find other translations that use the word not just where the NWT uses it, but some of these other places too.

(Revelation 11:10) And those dwelling on the earth rejoice [chairo] over them and celebrate, [euphraino] and they will send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those dwelling on the earth.

(Luke 12:19) “You have many good things stored up for many years; take it easy, eat, drink, enjoy yourself.”’ [ euphraino, also, "be merry"]

(Luke 15:22-24) ²² But the father said to his slaves, ‘Quick! bring out a robe, the best one, and clothe him with it, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet. ²³ Also bring the fattened calf, slaughter it, and let us eat and celebrate, [euphraino] ²⁴ for this son of mine was dead but has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.’ And they started to enjoy themselves. [euphraino]

(Luke 15:29) In reply he said to his father, ‘Look! These many years I have slaved for you and never once did I disobey your orders, and yet you never once gave me a young goat to enjoy [euphraino] with my friends.

(Luke 15:32) But we just had to celebrate [euphraino] and rejoice, [chairo] for your brother was dead but has come to life; he was lost and has been found.’”

(Acts 2:24-28) ²⁴ But God resurrected him by releasing him from the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held fast by it. ²⁵ For David says about him: ‘I keep Jehovah constantly in front of me, for he is at my right hand that I may never be shaken. ²⁶ On this account my heart became cheerful [euphraino] and my tongue rejoiced greatly.[Gk, agalliao] And I will reside in hope; ²⁷ because you will not leave me in the Grave, nor will you allow your loyal one to see corruption. ²⁸ You have made life’s ways known to me; you will fill me with great joy [euphrosyne] in your presence.’

When these Greek terms [euphraino/euphrosyne, agalliao, chairo] are used in such contexts, it should be clear that the idea of celebration is appropriate. Whenever you see the term "rejoice" in Scripture, you should know that celebration is appropriate. (I covered some of the "rejoice" verses in the previous post on this subject.) The NWT has also used the word "celebrate" to translate several of the places where these terms are used. Acts 2:24-28 ties these terms directly to Jesus' resurrection. And 1 Peter 1:3-9 includes the resurrection as a key part of what leads to our joy:

(1 Peter 1:3-9) ³ Praised be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, for according to his great mercy he gave us a new birth to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, ⁴ . . .  ⁶ Because of this you are greatly rejoicing,[Gk, agalliao] . . .  ⁸ Though you never saw him, you love him. Though you do not see him now, yet you exercise faith in him and are greatly rejoicing [Gk, agalliao] with an indescribable and glorious joy . . .

I would like to add that even if you don't believe that any of these terms really mean "celebrate," it doesn't matter, because it's what I meant when I used the term "celebrate."

When you ask where it is written that we must celebrate the death of Jesus, I would admit that the Bible never uses the terms for "celebrate" with respect to his death. When the NWT uses the expression 'celebrate the Passover' it's only in the sense of 'keeping' the occasion, as I mentioned in a previous post. None of the words implying a "celebration" are in the original Greek here. It's a more appropriate time to commemorate the seriousness of his death, and in effect a time to 'grieve' rather than celebrate:

(John 16:20-22) ²⁰ Most truly I say to you, you will weep and wail, but the world will rejoice;[chairo] you will be grieved, but your grief will be turned into joy. [chara] ²¹ When a woman is giving birth, she has grief because her hour has come, but when she has given birth to the child, she remembers the tribulation no more because of the joy that a man has been born into the world. ²² So you also, now you have grief; but I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, and no one will take away your joy.

That covers your questions #1 through #3 and questions #4 through #6 were obviously for someone else, since they had not bearing on anything I had said. As you should be able to see, the view is perfectly in accord with the verses you referred to: Matthew 26:17-30, 1 Cor 11:24, and especially Romans 12:2, where the context includes:

(Romans 12:11-15) . . .Be aglow with the spirit. Slave for Jehovah. ¹² Rejoice in the hope. . . . ¹⁵ Rejoice with those who rejoice; weep with those who weep.

4 hours ago, ComfortMyPeople said:

I apologize JWI, but I can't find in the thread the article you've pointed out as source of your answer. Could you be so kind of indicate me where is it mentioned?

After I pointed out the potential problems with it, Bible Speaks erased it. You can still find it in my quote of the original contributed article. The only thing I did is add some comments in brackets.

What I was speaking about is not a recommendation for what we as Witnesses should do, but about how quickly we tend to judge others and not give them the benefit of the doubt about their motives. When I am speaking about my own attitude toward Easter, I am not at all speaking of a formal, yearly celebration either, of course. I am only using the term Easter as a way to remind us of how quickly we pigeonhole people who would use the term Easter for a valid appreciation and celebratory rejoicing over Christ's resurrection. Yet for many people in many religions, they speak of wanting to do the exact same thing for their Easter celebration. In no way would a valid appreciation of Easter, in the sense of meditating on Christ's resurrection, diminish from our appreciation of The Last Supper and its meaning. So in a sense I only threw in the word "Easter" the way a Internet troll might try to see how fast someone would jump in and judge as if the word means the same to all people.

4 hours ago, Anna said:

Most of it (Easter) focuses on the resurrection of Christ and it is the resurrection that is celebrated, after all that is the happy time and climax of the whole event. But the only ceremonial event that Jesus instructed his followers to observe was the "last supper", practiced by by the Catholics and others as the Eucharist or holy communion etc. (not once a year but many times a year). Easter, for most people and their children, after they have been to the sermon, (that is if they bother to go to church) is about the bunnies and the eggs (chocolate or painted, the eggs that is) etc. with many countries having their own particular Easter traditions (derived from goodness knows where) such as boys flogging girls with hand made braided willow twigs. Ouch.

It's absolutely true that the only ceremonial event that Jesus instructed his followers to observe was the "last supper." We don't know that it should be followed yearly because the Bible doesn't say, but this makes perfect sense and is easily defended.

I suspect you are right about how most (50.1% or more) nominal Christians (churchgoers) celebrate Easter after the church sermon. I live in an area where there are three large churches, two of which were once synagogues 10 to 15 years ago, and they are attended by at least 1,000 cars between them, about two or three nights a week. Parking reaches to my house, three blocks away, on "Easter Sunday." Many are evangelicals and I've talked to them at their door and in some of their homes, of course. They give me a much more serious impression of what they think of their own regular church services. I'm only guessing that their view of Easter is similar. One of the churches is Baptist and they have built a kind of assembly hall across from the original church for their expansion needs. They tend to dress up in the cliche "Easter-best" of their Sunday-go-to-meeting clothes. It's a little bit comical, but I've seen a tendency to do the same at the Hall in recent years too. The Baptists are less likely to talk to Witnesses for very long around here.

I wasn't aware of the flogging rituals for children. Sounds as evil as Halloween. I see all the Easter candy at stores and think of it as just purely secular, and didn't really equate that with Easter in any sense. But you are right about kids and therefore a lot of parents. It's probably just about all they remember about Easter. 

4 hours ago, Anna said:

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Yet, this doesn't mean that the idea of celebrating Jesus birth is a bad thing

No it isn't. Those who are ignorant believe they are doing a fine thing, they are looking to the authority of the Church as their example and spiritual guide. The early Bible students thought it was a fine thing too. Why did they change?

As we all know, they changed because Christmas is too steeped in pagan influences. This was obviously a very valid choice and, not that it matters of course, but I go along with it perfectly. If they hadn't made this decision, they obviously would have made many important adjustments to the way it was celebrated to avoid so much paganism, removing the lies about a gift-giving magic fat-man, etc. I agree that it sends a clearer message not to celebrate at all, and it no doubt was expected to make Witnesses feel more separate, if not from the rest of world, at least from Russellism. If we discover that it was done just to make a colder and more serious, hardened, focused group out of these would-be Witnesses, in the same way that Rutherford spoke out against marriage, courtship, and romantic affection, then I wouldn't be surprised if certain compromises about Christmas might be made. I am not recommending this. As we know, both the Rutherford-following Bible Students and the Russell-following (Christmas-celebrating) Bible Students both fared equally well in Hitler's concentration camps, so I'm not sure if anyone can say that removing Christmas was a factor in the seriousness of their resolve.

4 hours ago, Anna said:

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

or even unscriptural.

I will have to disagree with you there. Your quoted scripture "(Luke 1:14, 15) 14 You will have joy and great gladness, and many will rejoice over his birth, 15 for he will be great in the sight of Jehovah. ." 

to me does not indicate John's birth was to be, or was, celebrated every year. I read it as a statement, that yes, many did rejoice over his birth, and verse 15 I believe was a projection into the future, again making a statement that when he grows up he WILL be great.

No, I'm sure it was never about people celebrating his birthday every year, just that people would celebrate the fact of his birth and what it led to. I think the word "for" makes the celebration happen in the future, but can't be sure. My only point is that Jesus' birth would be celebrated even more on that same principle. If people should feel this way about the forerunner, how much more celebratory would they feel about the real thing? I was not making any comment about yearly formal birthday celebrations, only a comment about the logical step that most people would naturally see in this verse.

5 hours ago, Anna said:

This shows that rejoicing, although as you pointed out is a celebration too, is different from an actual Church instituted celebration which is based more on ceremonious gestures and traditions rather than spontaneous feelings of joy and appreciation akin to praying constantly and giving thanks (any time, any where).

Yes, good point. But that is mostly how I intended it when saying that I, too, "celebrate Easter," meaning, of course, that I am thrilled and joyous each time I read the Bible accounts of Jesus death and resurrection, at any time of year. I thought it was important that my children learn to share that joy, and children sometimes need more tangible reminders in advance, especially if we are going to do three family Bible studies, three evenings in a row, ending each with a question about how they thought the disciples slept (or didn't sleep) that particular night from Thursday, Friday and Saturday. A mental re-enactment of what happened Sunday morning, through Bible reading of the events of that morning, was my method of "celebrating" for several of their younger years, and now I would do it again for my grandchildren. Of course, I would definitely never call it "celebrating Easter" in front of them, but I do see it as a kind of ceremonious gesture or tradition. There have been recommendations for 'family worship night' that are not so different.

3 hours ago, John Lindsay Barltrop said:

just my thoughts..........and a"little" more on Constantine

Absolutely true. I had just thought I'd start in with the first of many factual problems with the quote, but decided I could leave that up to others. We can compare Memorial notes later.

1 hour ago, AllenSmith said:

That's why true "Witnesses" keep to the only biblical driven commemoration of Christ death, NOT a celebration but a heartfelt appreciation, of his sacrifice.

I never claimed that I wouldn't be judged for it, but I'm not worried. That was my point in the first place, that we so often judge others harshly when so much of what they do is merely ignorance but often with the right motivation. A zeal sometimes, but without knowledge. For example, a couple of years back someone showed on these same forums (jw-archive, actually), a picture of the aftermath of a burnt Christmas tree and burnt presents, a lot of fire damage, and who knows, maybe even a melted nativity scene among the burnt wreckage. At least one poster was positively gleeful that they got what they deserved. (After all, Babylon the Great will be burnt with fire.)

Yet, this doesn't mean that the idea of celebrating Jesus birth is a bad thing, or even unscriptural. Did you never read the scripture that says:

(Luke 1:14, 15) 14 You will have joy and great gladness, and many will rejoice over his birth, 15 for he will be great in the sight of Jehovah. . .

This means that many people would rejoice over, or celebrate the birth of the lesser, forerunner to Jesus, who was much greater, and would bring much more rejoicing and celebration. Also, note that this joy over his birth would be after he was older, after he becomes someone known to be great in the sight of Jehovah.

But something else that often goes unnoticed is that this word for "rejoice" is the exact same word as the one translated as "celebrate" here, in the NWT:

(Revelation 11:10) 10 And those dwelling on the earth rejoice over them and celebrate, and they will send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those dwelling on the earth.

Although there is a range of meaning, as with most words, wherever the context is about exceeding joy or active rejoicing, the Greek word is properly translated "celebrate" in many English translations. That would mean that celebrate is also a good translation for these other verses:

(John 3:29) . . .But the friend of the bridegroom, when he stands and hears him, has a great deal of joy [celebrates] on account of the voice of the bridegroom. So my joy has been made complete.

(John 14:28) You heard that I said to you, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would rejoice [celebrate] that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am. [note the idea of "celebrating" Jesus' resurrection and ascension.]

(John 16:22) So you also, now you have grief; but I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, [celebrate] and no one will take away your joy.

Many more verses could be used, but the overall point is this:

(Matthew 11:16-19) 16 “With whom will I compare this generation? It is like young children sitting in the marketplaces who call out to their playmates, 17 saying: ‘We played the flute for you, but you did not dance; we wailed, but you did not beat yourselves in grief.’ 18 Likewise, John came neither eating nor drinking, but people say, ‘He has a demon.’ 19 The Son of man did come eating and drinking, but people say, ‘Look! A man who is a glutton and is given to drinking wine, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.’ All the same, wisdom is proved righteous by its works.”

(Philippians 4:4) 4 Always rejoice  [celebrate] in the Lord. Again I will say, Rejoice! [Celebrate!]

(1 Thessalonians 5:16-19) 16 Always be rejoicing. [celebrating] 17 Pray constantly. 18 Give thanks for everything. This is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus. 19 Do not put out the fire of the spirit.

For the sake of completeness, I should probably point out that there is one verse where the NWT uses the word "celebrate" when the Greek word just means "make" or "do" or in the following sense "keep."

(Matthew 26:18) . . ., ‘The Teacher says: “My appointed time is near; I will celebrate the Passover with my disciples at your home.”’”

In this case, the term "celebrate" is not so appropriate. It's the exact same common word as used here:

(Matthew 8:8, 9) . . .. 9 For I too am a man under authority, having soldiers under me, and I say to this one, ‘Go!’ and he goes, and to another, ‘Come!’ and he comes, and to my slave, ‘ Do this!’ and he does it.”

(Matthew 5:32) 32 However, I say to you that everyone divorcing his wife, except on account of sexual immorality, makes her a subject for adultery

In some senses, there is nothing wrong with "celebrating" the Lord's Evening Meal, but clearly 1 Corinthians 11 and other verses show that it is really only in the sense of "keeping" the institution, not your typical kind of joyful celebration, which was the sense with which the Bible refers to the disciple's attitude about Jesus' resurrection, ascension. But we rejoice in all the blessings that come about because of his death, and through his resurrection.

2 hours ago, Arauna said:

What happens when a nice compensation is not worth the event you are going to miss...  on the odd occasion one may find that no-one is prepared to give up a seat no matter how much the compensation.

Absolutely. Also, these days a lot more flights get cancelled, delayed and/or turn into stop-over nightmares. And, the various airlines no longer honor each other's tickets, so you are stuck with the schedule of a single airline. Plus, they book the smallest planes possible from every hub, meaning that there are fewer flexible passengers to choose from.

51 minutes ago, Anna said:

Yes, but that's not how most people celebrate Easter do they?

I don't know. But every single Easter Sermon that I have read, from modern times going back to the 1700's --and I've read about 20-- appears to revolve around this exact idea. And so did the separate lessons for children. Of course, in the 1600's through the early 1800's a majority of Protestants in this country also thought that celebrating Christmas was wrong. 

3 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

But really....which came first? The (true) Christians or the Egg?? 

"Omelette" you have that one.

On 4/20/2016 at 7:00 AM, Eoin Joyce said:

However, compliance with the fact that an "ancient Germanic goddess's name was retained for a Christian festival" is a bridge too far for me.

It spoils it for me too. Although during the Memorial season, I still celebrate Easter in the sense that with the family, I have always tried to get them to meditate on the events over the following weekend to imagine what probably happened on Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and then Sunday. And Sunday is a day to reflect on the awe and wonder and celebratory mood that Jesus' first followers must have had. When Memorial lands earlier in the week this is a perfect opportunity to extend the event into a "teachable moment" that lasts for several more days.

On 3/26/2016 at 9:30 PM, Jay Witness said:

Could it be said that our "Memorial" is our "Easter"?

In a sense, YES. Originally the Watchtower tied it more strictly to the Jewish calendar, and under Russell and Rutherford, it only landed near Easter Sunday on those particular times when the Jewish calendar coincided with the "catholic" method of defining Easter on the calendar. After Rutherford, the calendar choice the Watchtower has assigned ALWAYS coincides with the "catholic" method of defining Easter, so that we are always celebrating Memorial within a week of Easter, and therefore in the same season.

This makes it much easier to explain "the reason for the season" to interested persons. For several years, under Rutherford, interested persons were not invited. Not even the "great crowd" was invited. It was only attended by those who claimed to be part of the 144,000.

That's what happens when you don't "volunteer" to give up a seat on an overbooked flight. They randomly pick someone to get literally pulled off the plane. Yet, the airlines overbook on purpose, knowing that they almost never get 100% to show up, at which point they can usually accommodate a few stand-by travelers to fill up the plane.

I have been on many planes where an attendant asked for volunteers to get off the plane for the next flight home (often the next day), and it usually comes with an offer for a local hotel, a couple of meal vouchers, and a free round-trip flight to be used later in the year. Traveling alone for business, I often took them up on it, since I was always reimbursed anyway and didn't have to give the extra ticket back to the company. 

If the flight is having trouble finding volunteers, the usual way is to just up the offer, like $100 plus all of the above, then $200 plus all of the above. Someone always volunteers. It's cheaper than losing your brand reputation!

2 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

I suspect that the apostles had many questions like this  when Jesus commanded them to "Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations". And they had no idea of the scope of this work in the detailed manner that is possible for us in these times. 

Of course, Jesus last words at that time guaranteed success right down to our day and beyond :"And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things." Matt. 28:18-20.

Good point. When the activity of the first few years after Jesus' death included people of many nations (beginning at Pentecost) this must have answered the question for them. Technically, they could have reasoned that Jesus' command in Matthew 28 would be fulfilled if at least one person from every nation became a disciple. Yet, they saw that quick spread among all the [known] nations of the Roman Empire and realized that the "world" was being turned up-side-down by their teaching. Technically, even Matthew 24 didn't require that those nations be thoroughly preached in, only that the good news be preached there. Recall that the method Jesus had recommended for Israel was not to go from house to house, but only to stay with people in a city that would invite you. If they didn't, just kick the dust off your feet and move on to another place.

As you say they could hardly have imagined the scope and detail possible in our time.

I forgot to mention in previous comments that the Watchtower in 1995 had also made the same claim that Matthew 24:14 had already been fulfilled, but the larger context was that the work should keep going as urgently as ever:

*** w95 9/1 pp. 17-18 pars. 16-17 Christian Witnesses for Divine Sovereignty ***
Paul showed that he understood this well. By the year 61 C.E., he could say that the good news was “bearing fruit and increasing in all the world.” The good news was not limited to just one nation . . .  Rather, it was openly “preached in all creation that is under heaven.” (Colossians 1:6, 23; 2:13, 14, 16-18) Thus, the Israel of God in the first century fulfilled its commission to “‘declare abroad the excellencies’ of the one that called [them] out of darkness into his wonderful light.”
17 Still, that first-century preaching work was merely a foretaste of what would be accomplished during the last days. Looking forward especially to our time, Jesus said: “This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.” (Matthew 24:14; Mark 13:10) Has this prophecy been fulfilled? Indeed, it has.

In saying that the good news had been preached, back around 61, Paul never implied that the work was done. But he was more likely rejoicing in the extent to which the work had been blessed. That is implied in the conclusion of the same article:

*** w95 9/1 p. 18 par. 19 Christian Witnesses for Divine Sovereignty ***
No wonder the apostle Paul was moved to say: “Woe is me if I did not declare the good news!” (1 Corinthians 9:16) Christians today feel the same way. . . . The work that had a small beginning in 1919 has now reached astounding proportions. Almost five million Christians are witnessing for divine sovereignty . . .  What a joy it is to have a part in this work of sanctifying Jehovah’s name! As we enter the 1996 service year, let us be determined not to slow down. Rather, we will more than ever heed Paul’s words to Timothy: “Preach the word, be at it urgently.” (2 Timothy 4:2) As we do so, we pray with all our hearts that Jehovah will continue to bless our efforts.

5 hours ago, John Houston said:

So is there a title to the talk given 10 years ago?

I think it was the main talk at the  2006 Special Assembly Day called "Be Intensely Occupied With God's Inspired Word." Rumor has it that the brother who gave it was "demoted" from his "district convention" speaking assignments for going off-script. The 2007 "district convention" had a talk called "Do Not Follow After False Stories" where this same talk was alluded to.

4 hours ago, Anna said:

I don't know...perhaps you are right, but I tend to think of blood transfusions being more of a problem with dependent children rather than young adults who surely have the right to decide for themselves

True. It's a bit of a stretch. Besides, the same people who might have made the decision about inviting students may not have known what was going to be discussed last Wednesday. The article just needed a new angle and this one wasn't much in the way of getting to the real reasons behind what they reported. 

11 minutes ago, Tammie Nokes said:

So he is a member of the governing body?

No. Not even a Governing Body "Helper." Don't know anything about his current assignments.

Here is the list of current Governing Body "Helpers:"

On 4/8/2017 at 4:03 PM, Tammie Nokes said:

Who is the brother that gave the talk?

Bro. Rayford. 10 years ago. Nothing to see here.

An article in the 2006 Watchtower had just come out that said that Matthew 24:14 had already been fulfilled in Paul's day, and the end had already come, too:

• *** w06 2/1 p. 24 pars. 11-12 “A Witness to All the Nations” ***
• 11 Jehovah richly blessed the efforts of those and other zealous workers. Less than 30 years after Jesus foretold that there would be a witness to all the nations, Paul wrote that the “good news” had been “preached in all creation that is under heaven.” (Colossians 1:23) Did the end then come? In a sense, yes. It came upon the Jewish system of things in the year 70 C.E. when Roman armies destroyed Jerusalem along with the temple. Yet, Jehovah had determined that a far greater witness would be given before he would bring an end to Satan’s global system of things.

But there was no difference in the way that article spoke of the nearness of the fulfillment in our day, nothing about a complete fulfillment yet.

If I had to guess, Brother James Rayford is extrapolating from some comments that are heard from time to time by members of the Governing Body. The question comes up about whether Armageddon must wait until all nations have had a thorough witness. The answer is always, NO. And sometimes the verse in Colossians or another in Romans is used as a way of showing that 100% saturation is not necessary for the next items in the anticipated agenda to also be fulfilled. The point is that we can't wait and say that the end can't come yet, when Jesus said it could come any time. It's easy to misinterpret this somewhat if one wants to drive home a point about the closeness of the end.